Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Pope Francis - fuck your mother (Score 1) 894

by Gutboy (#48821515) Attached to: Pope Francis: There Are Limits To Freedom of Expression
Nice straw-man. Let's see what other fallacies you can come up with.

We don't know how the universe 'started'. This doesn't mean that everything came from nothing, it means we don't know. It certainly doesn't mean "we don't know, so a magic being who knows everything and can do anything created the universe".

Religion, which claims to have all the answers, can never accept "I don't know". They just instantly translate it to "God did it".

Comment: Re:Double standards... (Score 1) 710

by Gutboy (#45519511) Attached to: Getting Evolution In Science Textbooks For Texas Schools
Many folks would be wrong then.

Why? Because for biologists, there is no relevant difference between microevolution and macroevolution. Both happen in the same way and for the same reasons, so there is no real reason to differentiate them. When biologists do use different terms, it is simply for descriptive reasons. When creationists use the terms, however, it is for ontological reasons — this means that they are trying to describe two fundamentally different processes. The essence of what constitutes microevolution is, for creationists, different from the essence of what constitutes macroevolution. Creationists act as if there is some magic line between microevolution and macroevolution, but no such line exists as far as science is concerned. Macroevolution is merely the result of a lot of microevolution over a long period of time.

Evolution Explained - Micro vs Macro

Comment: Re:Let's look at this more closely (Score 1) 294

by Gutboy (#43337449) Attached to: Judge Rules That Resale of MP3s Violates Copyright Law
Debatable. IMHO running a piece of software shouldn't be governed by copyright law, but certainly some parts of the software industry believe that you need a licence to waive the copyright laws, since you are inherently copying the software into RAM. I don't think this has ever been tested in court (?)
WoWGlider lost a case where Blizzard claimed that them copying the game into memory violated their copyright. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glider_(bot)

Comment: Re:OB CN (Score 1) 441

by Gutboy (#42706441) Attached to: My cumulative GPA, thus far:
Then you sir, are an idiot and I wouldn't want to work *for* you. Try opening a dictionary someday and looking it up. It's a word, people need to get over it and move on with their lives.

Merriam Webster http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
Cambridge http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/irregardless?q=irregardless

Comment: Re:Do nothing (Score 1) 168

by Gutboy (#41792165) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What To Do When Finding a Security Breach On Shared Hosting?
You'll be fined no mater what the jury system determines. Defending yourself from any charges that are filed will take a non-trivial amount of money. You could lose your job (who wants a possible criminal working for them?), your possessions, etc. and still be found not guilty or have the charges dropped.

Breadth-first search is the bulldozer of science. -- Randy Goebel

Working...